Dost Mittar April 24, 2004
#277 Posted by gujjubania on May 4, 2004 6:19:31 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#276 Posted by arjun_m on May 4, 2004 6:19:12 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#275 Posted by arjun_m on May 4, 2004 6:19:12 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#274 Posted by sadna on May 3, 2004 5:59:00 pm
ballukhan #267
Thanks. To clarify, #210 was sarcasm too.
Thanks. To clarify, #210 was sarcasm too.
#273 Posted by stuka on May 3, 2004 5:39:32 pm
Arjun
Can you post the Outlook article here. I can`t find it there on the site.
Can you post the Outlook article here. I can`t find it there on the site.
#272 Posted by arjun_m on May 3, 2004 1:28:56 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#271 Posted by MantoLives on May 3, 2004 10:58:19 am
Arjun Bhai,
Some how you missed out this part from the editorial your quoted... why? Atleast Najam Sethi should be quoted in entirety.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_3-5-2004_pg3_1
``What has been repeated in the story is an old pitfall that the Indians need to avoid while visiting Pakistan. At the behavioural level, it starts with surprise. (This also happens to many Americans and Europeans visiting Pakistan for the first time.) Instead of seeing a fundamentalist society beating up women for not wearing the veil and sending ‘wine-drinkers’ to jail like the Taliban, they see people living more or less like Indians back home where too some ‘dry’ states drink themselves silly without being punished. But the trouble with the critical Indian is that, unwittingly, he/she puts on the mantle of the unforgiving, sanctimonious Pakistani moaning about his sinning compatriots. He refuses to change his pre-formed view of Pakistani society. He is actually resentful that his definition of Pakistan is challenged by reality. He is always more comfortable with his own definition of the ‘other’ in life because that indirectly defines his own identity. ``
Some how you missed out this part from the editorial your quoted... why? Atleast Najam Sethi should be quoted in entirety.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_3-5-2004_pg3_1
``What has been repeated in the story is an old pitfall that the Indians need to avoid while visiting Pakistan. At the behavioural level, it starts with surprise. (This also happens to many Americans and Europeans visiting Pakistan for the first time.) Instead of seeing a fundamentalist society beating up women for not wearing the veil and sending ‘wine-drinkers’ to jail like the Taliban, they see people living more or less like Indians back home where too some ‘dry’ states drink themselves silly without being punished. But the trouble with the critical Indian is that, unwittingly, he/she puts on the mantle of the unforgiving, sanctimonious Pakistani moaning about his sinning compatriots. He refuses to change his pre-formed view of Pakistani society. He is actually resentful that his definition of Pakistan is challenged by reality. He is always more comfortable with his own definition of the ‘other’ in life because that indirectly defines his own identity. ``
#270 Posted by tahmed32 on May 3, 2004 10:58:18 am
rsridhar # you write `` One single article has sparked off this debate in Pak. I wonder if Pakis have any sense of balance. ``
I counted the last 19 posts to be all between Indians. Just for the record.
But dont let me interrupt whatever debate you (I am sorry, I mean ``We, the illiterate, deluded Pakis``) are having. :-)
I counted the last 19 posts to be all between Indians. Just for the record.
But dont let me interrupt whatever debate you (I am sorry, I mean ``We, the illiterate, deluded Pakis``) are having. :-)
#269 Posted by rsridhar on May 3, 2004 7:23:36 am
re:#264 by arjun_m
I do not think India cares if Pakis decide not to be friendly to India. I mean, who are they kidding!
``Friendly ho kar hum pey koi ahsaan kar rahey hain kya?``
It is in Pak`s own interest to be friendly to India. Its vast madrassa educated public will have to swallow pride and sue for peace. This will be a major problem for Pak. They need to take several blows to their H and D and move along a course that will be beneficial to Pak more than to India. One single article has sparked off this debate in Pak. I wonder if Pakis have any sense of balance.
Sridhar
I do not think India cares if Pakis decide not to be friendly to India. I mean, who are they kidding!
``Friendly ho kar hum pey koi ahsaan kar rahey hain kya?``
It is in Pak`s own interest to be friendly to India. Its vast madrassa educated public will have to swallow pride and sue for peace. This will be a major problem for Pak. They need to take several blows to their H and D and move along a course that will be beneficial to Pak more than to India. One single article has sparked off this debate in Pak. I wonder if Pakis have any sense of balance.
Sridhar
#268 Posted by ballukhan on May 3, 2004 7:03:07 am
#265 by sadna on May 2, 2004 8:51pm PT
That was an insightful piece of satire .
That was an insightful piece of satire .
#267 Posted by arjun_m on May 3, 2004 7:03:07 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#266 Posted by dost_mittar on May 3, 2004 5:15:41 am
DM#264
Ironically, I have learnt (not from chowk) that this article has been published by the same newspaper`s Sunday Magazine.
Ironically, I have learnt (not from chowk) that this article has been published by the same newspaper`s Sunday Magazine.
#265 Posted by sadna on May 2, 2004 8:51:38 pm
Basically, Pakistanis jihadis went to Afghanistan to help THEM self-determinate too. Between the Afghans and Pakistanis, the place was flattened to rubble. Women self-determinated at home and the self-determinated men banned pictures in books teaching self-determinated children how to avoid being killed by mines. Then the Americans came back and now Afghans are unable to self-determinate anymore. How cruel..
Kashmiris want to self-determinate with the help of Pakistani jihadis too. The person Abdul Ghani Lone who, in the past, had invited the self-determinated Afghans, the Taliban to Kashmir, was himself shot dead by self-determinated jihadis. Now the next generation of Kashmiri leaders, Ms Mehbooba Mufti, Omar Abdullah, Mirwaiz Omar Farooq and etc are now themselves targets of self-determining jihadis. How meaningful..
And one big reason for all this to happen was to prevent the self-determination of Pakhtuns of Pakistan. How principled..
Kashmiris want to self-determinate with the help of Pakistani jihadis too. The person Abdul Ghani Lone who, in the past, had invited the self-determinated Afghans, the Taliban to Kashmir, was himself shot dead by self-determinated jihadis. Now the next generation of Kashmiri leaders, Ms Mehbooba Mufti, Omar Abdullah, Mirwaiz Omar Farooq and etc are now themselves targets of self-determining jihadis. How meaningful..
And one big reason for all this to happen was to prevent the self-determination of Pakhtuns of Pakistan. How principled..
#264 Posted by ballukhan on May 2, 2004 8:17:07 pm
Stuka:
Treason vs Dissent-
This guy is not talking about dissent and its resolution in the democratic frame work of Indian constitution- he is talking about `self-determination` using the instrument of plebiscite (the official PAki position) not only for Kashmir but for all the parts of India which are `anti-India`(!) and have been `held hostage` at the gun point (I wonder what the entire PAki Nation would do as it is held hostage at the gun point by its army?).
So much for someone who does not care what others think. But pleeze...do not send your jehadis (or jehadi contribution) across the border in order to express your deep concern for Indian muslims!
Treason vs Dissent-
This guy is not talking about dissent and its resolution in the democratic frame work of Indian constitution- he is talking about `self-determination` using the instrument of plebiscite (the official PAki position) not only for Kashmir but for all the parts of India which are `anti-India`(!) and have been `held hostage` at the gun point (I wonder what the entire PAki Nation would do as it is held hostage at the gun point by its army?).
So much for someone who does not care what others think. But pleeze...do not send your jehadis (or jehadi contribution) across the border in order to express your deep concern for Indian muslims!
#263 Posted by arjun_m on May 2, 2004 8:17:07 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#262 Posted by stuka on May 2, 2004 5:02:21 pm
Vertex:
``Ultimately it is the people with guns that fight...
And apparently people with internet access too...:-) ``
Nahi yaar, we are blow hards. :-)
``Ultimately it is the people with guns that fight...
And apparently people with internet access too...:-) ``
Nahi yaar, we are blow hards. :-)
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- sadna: Do you remember the... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- hamidm2: Re: # 115 tahmed, ... you... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- sadna: PS: I think the... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- sadna: Agreed rahul_capri. btw Arif... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- tahmed32: hamidm: you write "roti... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- hamidm2: Re: # 112 arjun mian, ....... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- rahul_capri: OK,point noted.Thats one interpretation.IF... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- KaalChakra: That is exactly right,... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal








reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content